Trouble understanding the answer to this torque question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cornbreadddd
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Torque
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on understanding torque in the context of rotational equilibrium, specifically regarding a board with a hanging weight. The correct calculation involves recognizing that the torque due to the board's weight is measured from its center of mass, which is 0.3 m from the point of rotation. The book's solution demonstrates that the net torque is zero when the clockwise torque equals the counterclockwise torque, confirming that the weight of the board is 2 kg. The key takeaway is that the location of the center of mass is crucial for torque calculations, as it simplifies the analysis without affecting equilibrium.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of torque and rotational equilibrium
  • Familiarity with the concept of center of mass
  • Basic knowledge of gravitational forces
  • Ability to apply rotational equilibrium equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of static equilibrium in physics
  • Learn about calculating torque using different pivot points
  • Explore the concept of center of mass in various shapes and systems
  • Investigate advanced torque problems involving multiple forces and distances
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on mechanics, as well as educators seeking to clarify concepts of torque and equilibrium in their teaching materials.

Cornbreadddd
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Screen%20Shot%202018-03-31%20at%2012.17.21%20PM.png
[/B]

Homework Equations



The relevant equations are obviously going to be the rotational equilibrium expressions regarding balancing clockwise and counterclockwise movement as it relates to T = Fx lever-arm.

The Attempt at a Solution



First...here is the answer that the back of the book gives:
[/B]
  1. "B is correct. The axis of rotation is the point where the rope attached to the board. The hanging weight creates a counter-clockwise torque equal to 3 kg x 0.2 m. The weight of the board creates a clockwise torque at the distance from the rope attachment to the board's center of mass, which is 0.3 m. The net torque is zero, so the clockwise torque equals the counterclockwise torque, so 3 kg x 0.2 m = 0.3 m times the weight of the board. Therefore, the weight of the board is 2 kg."
My question is...why is it that when calculating the torque due to the weight of the board...you measure only to center of mass, especially since there is no fulcrum there or anything. Why wouldn't you measure all the way until the end of the board (0.8m instead of 0.3m) and have your equation be:

(0.8 x mass of board) = (0.2 x mass of board) + (0.2 x 3kg) ----> mass = 1kg

If the answer in the book is correct...and only that extra 0.3 meters between the rope (center of rotation) and center of mass is relevant...then how come the other 0.5 meters to the right of the board doesn't throw everything out of equilibrium...I mean it is extra weight after all, right?

It's clear I have some sort of fundamental conceptual hole in my understanding of torque as it pertains to equilibrium, but I'm having trouble filling that hole in...any help would be very appreciated, thanks!
 

Attachments

  • Screen%20Shot%202018-03-31%20at%2012.17.21%20PM.png
    Screen%20Shot%202018-03-31%20at%2012.17.21%20PM.png
    45.8 KB · Views: 1,659
Physics news on Phys.org
Cornbreadddd said:
My question is...why is it that when calculating the torque due to the weight of the board...you measure only to center of mass, especially since there is no fulcrum there or anything.
The additional force of gravity (not shown in the picture) acts at the center of mass because it is an external force. Also note that if the sum of the torques is zero because the object is in static equilibrium, it doesn't matter about what point you calculate torques.
 
Cornbreadddd said:
(0.8 x mass of board) = (0.2 x mass of board) + (0.2 x 3kg) ----> mass = 1kg
The correct way to do it this way would be:
$$(0.2 \times 3) + (0.1 \times 0.2m) = (0.4 \times 0.8m)$$
Where you separate the beam into two masses:
  1. One 20% of the total beam mass ##m## where its center of gravity is at 0.1 m of the rope;
  2. One 80% of the total beam mass ##m## where its center of gravity is at 0.4 m of the rope.
You can also divide the beam into 10 smaller masses if you want:
$$(0.2 \times 3) + (0.15 \times 0.1m) + (0.05 \times 0.1m) = (0.05 \times 0.1m) + (0.15 \times 0.1m) + (0.25 \times 0.1m) + (0.35 \times 0.1m) + (0.45 \times 0.1m) + (0.55 \times 0.1m) + (0.65 \times 0.1m) + (0.75 \times 0.1m)$$
The answer is still the same. Note how the 2 masses on the left side are counterbalanced by their two similar masses, at similar distances, on the right side, thus having no effects on the resultant torque.

You could of course repeat the exercise by dividing the beam into 100s or 1000s of smaller masses and the results would still be the same. That is what a center of gravity defines: A equivalent point where the total weight can be applied without creating any resultant torque.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Tom.G
Wow, thanks so much! I'm getting closer to having a good intuition of it now. Since the force of gravity acts at the center of mass, with such a magnitude that the system is in equilibrium, it doesn't matter where the torque is calculated.

Thank you again! That was very helpful and kind.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K